Dresden: Take One (Nazi Torch March / Bombing Remembrance)

[Widerstand]

Today's the first of two days of Nazi activity in Dresden. They are having a Torch March in Dresden's inner city to morn the German victims of the Dresden bombing. On the 19th a large Nazi march is set in Dresden, which peaked at 7000 attendants in past years, making it one of the biggest (if not the biggest) Nazi gatherings in Europe.

There's nation-wide (European-wide?) mobilization to block the march on the 19th, while todays events are largely met by local AntiFa only (they are, amongst other things, organizing a city tour showing all the places of Nazi aggression in Third Reich Dresden).

10:00 - the central station, where the Nazis are supposed to gather at 14:00 is blocked by large police forces, they put up blockades and are physically blocking the area. Persons passing the area are randomly searched.

13:25 - Police is stocking up. Amongst other things, large amounts of water tanks (it's snowing in Dresden btw) and anti-blockade tanks.

http://media.de.indymedia.org/images/2011/02/300382.jpg

A rally, supposed to be several hours before the Nazi's arrival and far away from it has been forbidden because it was an "estimated threat." The topic was to point out Dresden's role in the Nazi machinery and to debunk the myth that Dresden was "innocent". Several older citizens were around, by no means was it a homogeneous black bloc (as claimed by police).

http://media.de.indymedia.org/images/2011/02/300383.jpg

Police drawn together from all over Germany is blocking a 200-people strong Anti-Nazi demo, completely sealed off the whole city district and errected blockades at various strategic points.

http://media.de.indymedia.org/images/2011/02/300384.jpg

¡No Pasarán!

[Widerstand]

Some pics from the "official"/"municipality-organized"/"bourgeois" Anti-Nazi human-chain:

http://www.taz.de/uploads/hp_taz_img/full/menschenkette-dresden.jpg

http://www.taz.de/uploads/hp_taz_img/full/eckhardt_pau.jpg

And the official mourning activities:

http://www.taz.de/uploads/hp_taz_img/full/kranzniederlegung-heidefriedhof.20110213-14.jpg

13:58 - members of the American Football team "Dresden Monarchs" are collectively gathering to protest the Nazi march and to mourn the victims of the bombings.
14:08 - 300 people blocking Fritz-Löffler Platz, where Nazi-buses are expected to arrive.
14:25 - the first Nazi group of around 70 people has arrived at central station by train. Police in the train separated Nazis from AntiFa taking the same train.
14:30 - 600 people at Fritz-Löffler-Platz. Around 2.000 Anti-Nazi protesters are reported to move towards central station.
14:35 - a group of around 70 people has split from Flitz-Löffler-Platz to meet with the Nazis.

[Widerstand]

Some figures:

The Torch March was visited by between 1000 to 1300 Nazis.

The city tour for remembrance of Nazi atrocities, although forbidden by a Dresden court, had around 300 attendants, mostly older people, as well as some politicians of Die Linke und B90/Die Grünen.

Shortly before noon, around 50 protested against historical revisionism at a graveyard, but were quickly removed by police.

The anti-Nazi human chain reached around 3,5 km, with about 10.000 attendants. It connected completely at 14:00.

Shortly after the human chain connected, around 200 people demonstrated against historical revisionism again.

As the human chain broke apart, several people went to meet with Nazis, and were joined by around 2000 others. Police searched many younger protesters because of illegal "masking" (it's cold as hell and snowing in Dresden).

[Sasha]

(it's cold as hell and snowing in Dresden).


fuck yeah, i rember that from 2 years ago, it was cold as fuck and there was way less snow as on the pics ^ now. my mate forgot your not allowed to wear shoes with steeltipped toes on german demo's and was send to find some sneakers on his socks by the pigs :blink:

[TC]

Firebombing cities is mass murder no matter who governs them. Apologizing for American and British atrocities is no more acceptable than apologizing for Nazi atrocities.

[Widerstand]

fuck yeah, i rember that from 2 years ago, it was cold as fuck and there was way less snow as on the pics ^ now. my mate forgot your not allowed to wear shoes with steeltipped toes on german demo's and was send to find some sneakers on his socks by the pigs :blink:

You spoiled Dutch with all your legalized passive weaponry :lol:


Firebombing cities is mass murder no matter who governs them. Apologizing for American and British atrocities is no more acceptable than apologizing for Nazi atrocities.

:rolleyes:

Of course no one is or was apologizing for anything, but as long as it can be used to support some confused notion of Anti-Imperialism, even Antifascism will be slandered and Nazis will be supported :rolleyes:

[Sinister Cultural Marxist]

Firebombing cities is mass murder no matter who governs them. Apologizing for American and British atrocities is no more acceptable than apologizing for Nazi atrocities.

Its not being an apologist for the British or Americans to argue that the Nazis are lying in their remembrance of history.

[The Douche]

Firebombing cities is mass murder no matter who governs them. Apologizing for American and British atrocities is no more acceptable than apologizing for Nazi atrocities.

And so the appropriate position is to stand against American imperialism and nazi historical revision.

What makes you think that isn't the position of the anti-fascists?

[Rusty Shackleford]

gasoline in bottles with rag-whicks provide good heat right?

dont wanna get cold.

[Widerstand]

gasoline in bottles with rag-whicks provide good heat right?

dont wanna get cold.

Hahahaha. These glorious times are gone. Mollies have become a very rare sight in Germany.

[TC]

And so the appropriate position is to stand against American imperialism and nazi historical revision.

What makes you think that isn't the position of the anti-fascists?

What makes you think that I think it isn't the position of the anti-fascists?

however

"The topic was to point out Dresden's role in the Nazi machinery and to debunk the myth that Dresden was "innocent"."

Sounds like potential apologies for imperialist mass murder. I'm sorry but this is a lie: many in Dresden were innocent. Can you believe the children who burned to death or asphyxiated were "guilty"? They were killed because of their nationality/"ethnicity"/"race" and location - nothing more - nothing different from the Nazi's in that regard.

[Widerstand]

What makes you think that I think it isn't the position of the anti-fascists?

Perhaps it is the fact that the user you quoted actually knows something of the groups mobilizing for these protests. The Anti-German participation died out around 2004, it's been then taken over by a variety of groups, some questionable (mostly bourgeois parties), some very supportable; a lot of them are strictly Anti-Imperialist, Communist or Anarchist.



"The topic was to point out Dresden's role in the Nazi machinery and to debunk the myth that Dresden was "innocent"." Sounds like potential apologies for imperialist mass murder.

Actually it is just debunking the Nazi myth that there were no atrocities commited in Dresden, but yeah right, I guess that's the same as "apologizing for imperialist mass murder", if one is a Nazi supporter. :rolleyes:


I'm sorry but this is a lie: many in Dresden were innocent. Can you believe the children who burned to death or asphyxiated were "guilty"? They were killed because of their nationality/"ethnicity"/"race" and location - nothing more - nothing different from the Nazi's in that regard.

Can you believe that at least 5000 Jews from Dresden died in concentration camps?
Can you believe that people were halting Jews on the street during the bombing and stopped them from removing their Jew-mark?
Can you believe that the Hamburg bombing had twice as many victims as Dresden, yet no one gives a shit about Hamburg because it's hard to argue that all the chemical industry seated in the harbor area didn't make a good target, whereas it seems rather easy to argue that the "purely cultural" Dresden (which is a lie btw, Dresden certainly did have Nazi-proliferating industry) was totally innocently and bombed for no reason other than bloodthirst?

You know what, I can believe all that. I can, however, not believe that someone openly supporting the biggest Nazi march in Europe, which falls in line with massive historic revisionism and relativism, and denouncing Anti-Fascist resistance against said Nazis and their historical revisionism as "supporting imperialist mass murder" has the fucking guts to come on a leftist website and pose as a leftist. It's fucking disgusting.

[Os Cangaceiros]

Firebombing cities is mass murder no matter who governs them. Apologizing for American and British atrocities is no more acceptable than apologizing for Nazi atrocities.

You'll notice that, out of the three primary forces in the Allied offensive against Nazi Germany, one side in particular is not mentioned here LOL

[gorillafuck]

The topic was to point out Dresden's role in the Nazi machinery and to debunk the myth that Dresden was "innocent".Explain this, because this statement looks like it's apologizing for the bombing of Dresden. I hope I'm mistaken.

I support exposing Nazi lies and not letting them use dresden to promote their agenda, but would these antifascists try to expose how Nagasaki "wasn't so innocent" either?

[Widerstand]

Explain this, because this statement looks like it's apologizing for the bombing of Dresden. I hope I'm mistaken.

I support exposing Nazi lies and not letting them use dresden to promote their agenda, but would these antifascists try to expose how Nagasaki "wasn't so innocent" either?

Well the Nazis basically run around and say "no one in Dresden ever harmed anyone during the Holocaust or supported Hitler in WW2 in any way" (which what is meant when anyone talks about Dresden's "innocence"), which is a blatant lie and completely writes the Jewish deaths in Dresden out of existence (and all the other ones, too). If you think this is "okay", because not doing it is "apologizing for the bombing of Dresden", you might want to either check which side you are on, of if what you call "apologizing" is really such a bad thing.

Not to mention that comparing the Dresden to the Nagasaki bombing is fucking gross. The Dresden bombing wasn't even closely as bad (unless you believe the long-since refuted Nazi propaganda of "350.000 deaths"). As I mentioned earlier, the Hamburg bombing had far more victims and larger parts of the city were destroyed (and parts of the old industrial areas are still contaminated), yet no one talks about Hamburg ever or mourns there and no fucking Nazi would step into here to do a bombing mourning - why? Because Hamburg couldn't be propagated as an "innocent city" with all the chemical industry around. Dresden for whatever reason could, and that propaganda apparently stuck good.

Though to be honest I see no fucking reason why I am in any position to explain the actions of elderly people and Antifascists from Dresden. If you think 7000 Nazis running through the city is good because they fight "American imperialism", honestly, fuck off the left.

[TC]

I can, however, not believe that someone openly supporting the biggest Nazi march in Europe, which falls in line with massive historic revisionism and relativism, and denouncing Anti-Fascist resistance against said Nazis and their historical revisionism as "supporting imperialist mass murder" has the fucking guts to come on a leftist website and pose as a leftist. It's fucking disgusting.

I'm Jewish, and I'm not a self-hating German, so your pathetic attempt to shame me isn't going to work. I'm not going to be bullied and intimidated because someone ridiculously and totally inappropriately has the audacity to suggest that I "openly support[ed] the biggest Nazi march in Europe" when I've done nothing of the sort.

You should be ashamed of yourself. You really should. How dare you use the threat of slandering someone as a Nazi sympathizer to silence discussion over whether murdering civilians is something to be defended?

Do you have no basic decency, and no respect for the lives lost in the Holocaust that you would abuse their memory by using it as a weapon to insulate your rhetoric from criticism? Are you really that absorbed in your own argument?

What I replied to was this:



The topic was to point out Dresden's role in the Nazi machinery and to debunk the myth that Dresden was "innocent"

And what I said was this:



Sounds like potential apologies for imperialist mass murder. I'm sorry but this is a lie: many in Dresden were innocent. Can you believe the children who burned to death or asphyxiated were "guilty"? They were killed because of their nationality/"ethnicity"/"race" and location - nothing more - nothing different from the Nazi's in that regard.

The issue is not and has never been, whether everyone in Dresden was "innocent", whether there was no one guilty in Dresden. That's absurd and ridiculous, there are plenty of people who constitute legitimate military targets in every city and town on the globe.

The issue was whether no one was innocent - where there no civilians? No children? No one who resisted the Nazis?

Of course you cant' say that. You offered an apology, a defense, of burning people for the sins of their neighbors. That, is disgusting.
Those are the types of actual ideas that fascists endorse.

[Widerstand]

I'm Jewish, and I'm not a self-hating German, so your pathetic attempt to shame me isn't going to work. I'm not going to be bullied and intimidated because someone ridiculously and totally inappropriately has the audacity to suggest that I "openly support[ed] the biggest Nazi march in Europe" when I've done nothing of the sort.

Well you just denounced Anti-Fascist resistance to that march on principle and you suggested that what the Nazis do is an agreeable cause. That very much amounts to openly supporting it, don't you think?



You should be ashamed of yourself. You really should. How dare you use the threat of slandering someone as a Nazi sympathizer to silence discussion over whether murdering civilians is something to be defended?

Do you have no basic decency, and no respect for the lives lost in the Holocaust that you would abuse their memory by using it as a weapon to insulate your rhetoric from criticism? Are you really that absorbed in your own argument?

Well do YOU have no respect for the victims of Dresden to not abuse their memory to apologize for Nazi marches? What will you say to all the elderly people on the street whose parent's died in the bombing? "Well your parents died because of WW2, but Hitler really was the good guy, the Americans are the bad ones, go home and let the Nazis do their stuff"? :rolleyes:




The issue is not and has never been, whether everyone in Dresden was "innocent", whether there was no one guilty in Dresden. That's absurd and ridiculous, there are plenty of people who constitute legitimate military targets in every city and town on the globe.

That certainly is what the issue has been, because that's what the Nazis you are defending suggest.



The issue was whether no one was innocent - where there no civilians? No children? No one who resisted the Nazis?

That's certainly not what the issue has been, because by that definition every city was "innocent".



Of course you cant' say that. You offered an apology, a defense, of burning people for the sins of their neighbors. That, is disgusting.
Those are the types of actual ideas that fascists endorse.

Actually I didn't do that. What I did was give an account of what Dresden's Anti-Fa did, and then I defended it. Pointing out that Jews died in Dresden (despite contrary Nazi claims) isn't the same as apologizing for the bombings. Pointing out that the bombings were grossly distorted throughout history (the classical example would be how 20.000 actual deaths somehow became 350.000 deaths in various historical accounts) isn't the same as apologizing for anything either. And fighting against 7000 Nazis gathering in a city isn't the same as apologizing for anything either.

[gorillafuck]

If you think this is "okay", because not doing it is "apologizing for the bombing of Dresden", you might want to either check which side you are on, of if what you call "apologizing" is really such a bad thing.I don't think that. Nothing I said remotely indicates that. Where on Earth did you get that idea...?


Not to mention that comparing the Dresden to the Nagasaki bombing is fucking gross. The Dresden bombing wasn't even closely as bad (unless you believe the long-since refuted Nazi propaganda of "350.000 deaths").
Dresden bombing = 35,000 deaths

Nagasaki bombing = 80,000

Fair enough. a more accurate comparison would be the firebombing of Tokyo.

Also, whether a city was "innocent" in regards to having nazi's in it is hardly relevant to whether internationalists support imperialist war.


Though to be honest I see no fucking reason why I am in any position to explain the actions of elderly people and Antifascists from Dresden. If you think 7000 Nazis running through the city is good because they fight "American imperialism", honestly, fuck off the left.That's exactly what I think, and you can tell because it's exactly what I said! oh no, I've been exposed!

[Widerstand]

I don't think that. Nothing I said remotely indicates that. Where on Earth did you get that idea...?

Where I get the idea that you think that? Well maybe because you are opposing the Anti-Nazi protests in Dresden? Maybe because you think it is somehow not right (and it indeed is quite left) to point out what role Dresden played in the Nazi machinery and that Dresden was far from being "innocent"?



Dresden bombing = 35,000 deaths

Nagasaki bombing = 80,000

That's at least closer to the actual number than the other crap thrown around on here, but recent estimates are around 18,000 deaths, peaking at 25.000. Also, the Dresden bombing didn't contaminate the area for decades, lead to masses of birth defects, cancer, etc. So no, the Dresden bombing was nowhere close to as bad as the Nagasaki bombing, that comparison is ridiculous.


Fair enough. a more accurate comparison would be the firebombing of Tokyo.

Or the bombing of Hamburg, which had twice as many victims, left 900.000 people homeless, chemically contaminated huge areas around the harbor, etc. But as I said before, absolutely nobody cares about Hamburg because it can't be used for propaganda purposes as much as Dresden.



Also, whether a city was "innocent" in regards to having nazi's in it is hardly relevant to whether internationalists support imperialist war.

Where does anyone support an imperialist war? Are you talking about those here who suggest that the Nazis weren't so bad because of what America did? When Nazis argue that Dresden was innocent what they argue is exactly that Dresden had no role in WW2 or the Holocaust, which is historical revisionism of the worst kind. When you claim that fighting these lies and exposing them for what they are is "supporting imperialist war", you're siding with the Nazis. Like it or stop it.

[Sasha]

Ok, I'm going to hand some verbals out all-around. If you peeps can't keep it civil, and that means no calling each other nazi or imperialist in any variation, its off to the trash with most of this thread and bomber Harris here might start to rain down some infractions.

[thälmann]

the topic was not if the nazimarch is ok because dresden bombing wasnt good. so thats not the topic. i guess its about if you can defend the bombing of dresden or not. and in this point, staatsfeind, we should accept that the discussion inside the whole german left is a lot different than in other countries. and its going strange ways with these " bomber harris do it again" stuff.
somebody should not forget that you are talking with comrades and not with german nazis or old people who say " we were also victims like the jews".

i think it was right to bomb the german cities, but in the case of dresden there are some points to question. why only the civilian population, and not the areas where the elite where living? wasnt the war already won? and some people also think that this was against the oncoming sowjets.

to the big march at 19th: last year 12000 people could block it, but this year the court said the police have to clear the streets. so it could be very intersting...

[Invader Zim]

Not to mention that comparing the Dresden to the Nagasaki bombing is fucking gross. The Dresden bombing wasn't even closely as bad (unless you believe the long-since refuted Nazi propaganda of "350.000 deaths")

There is a contradiction in your argument here. On the one hand you attempt to at least partially justify the allied bombing of Dresden by stating:

"Dresden certainly did have Nazi-proliferating industry"

But so did Nagasaki. So did London, so did Tokyo, so did Hamburg, so did Coventry, etc. Yet you describe such comparison as 'disgusting'. Why? It strikes me as perfectly legitimate. Indeed, the only difference is in terms of scale of destruction, Nagasaki was undoubtedly more costly in human terms than Dresden. However, Hiroshima was far more costly than Nagasaki, as was the Tokyo firebombing.



whether internationalists support imperialist war.

Is there a difference between internationalists supporting an imperialist war and internationalists supporting an imperialist war because that war prevents the extermination of entire groups by an aggressive fascist superpower? Obviously the western powers did not involve themselves in WW2 to aid the plight of Europes jews, they did so out of self interest. However for a leftist on the ground in 1944, when the news of the deaths camps started to become fully known through out the world, what do you think their position should have been? I ask this as a serious and respectful question. Or to take this question and palce it in a modern context, what would the position be regarding 'western' intervention in Rwanda in 1994?

I ask because I've been reading a fair bit about Allied knowledge of the holocaust, as early as it began, at Auschwitz and the subsequent debate among historians as to whether the western powers were guilty of ignoring it when it is possible that they could have tried to prevent or at least disrupt it, by bombing specific rail lines, etc. Your point raises the question in more general terms for leftists. At what point, if any, is it appropriate to call for intervention by an imerpialist power? Is it right to support the lesser of two evils in this context?

[Widerstand]

There is a contradiction in your argument here. On the one hand you attempt to at least partially justify the allied bombing of Dresden by stating:

"Dresden certainly did have Nazi-proliferating industry"

I don't "attempt to justify", I present a fact. A fact which has been denied by German Nazis and the far right for ages. Whatever you think of the Dresden bombing, you can't simply write the existence of Nazi-proliferating industry out of existence just because it doesn't suit your narrative.



But so did Nagasaki. So did London, so did Tokyo, so did Hamburg, so did Coventry, etc. Yet you describe such comparison as 'disgusting'. Why? It strikes me as perfectly legitimate. Indeed, the only difference is in terms of scale of destruction, Nagasaki was undoubtedly more costly in human terms than Dresden. However, Hiroshima was far more costly than Nagasaki, as was the Tokyo firebombing.

The comparison is disgusting precisely because of the scale (in another thread on Dresden a poster went as far as claiming that Dresden had more victims than Nagasaki). There is also one more difference, namely that of contamination.

I can however quite imagine that if there was such a thing as Japanese Neo-Nazis which mourn Nagasaki and claim that Japan only had a victim role in WW2 (I don't know whether or not this exists), that Japanese leftists would oppose this as well.

[Invader Zim]

I don't "attempt to justify", I present a fact

Sure, and I presented a fact; that Nagasaki was no less 'legitimate' a target for the stratigic bombing campaign than Dresden, in fact it was arguably a more legitimate target because of the considerable heavy industry in the city and its role a major sea port in the south of Japan, and that therefore your moral outrage in the case of Nagasaki is misplaced given your apparent acceptance of the destruction of Dresden. They were both manifestations of the precise same stratigic bombing campaign. Outrage at one, but not at the other, is inconsistant.


A fact which has been denied by German Nazis and the far right for ages.

But that isn't what I've taken issue with, what I take issue with is your moral outrage at the comparison between Nagasaki and Dresden, as if one was more or less justifiable than the other.


Whatever you think of the Dresden bombing, you can't simply write the existence of Nazi-proliferating industry out of existence just because it doesn't suit your narrative.

I haven't proffered a narrative or indeed taken issue with yours. So why don't you address what I did say, as opposed to a strawman you have constructed on my behalf?


The comparison is disgusting precisely because of the scale

So, by this logic scale of destruction and life lost is what matters, not the legitimacy of the target? However, if you actually look at Nagasaki in the context of the stratigic bombing campaign you will soon discover that in terms of life lost, and percent of the city destroyed, it was only a small part of a campaign. it has been estimated that the stratigic bombing of Japan in that last seven months of the war cost 700,000 Japanese lives and some 300,000+ civilians were killed in Germany as a result of the bombing campaign. As a result, heinus as the bombing of Nagasaki might appear to you, it actually represents a few percent of the total loss of life in the allied bombing camapigns in WW2. So my point is that decrying a comparison between one part of the campaign and another part of it is plainly ludicrous.

[Widerstand]

Sure, and I presented a fact; that Nagasaki was no less 'legitimate' a target for the stratigic bombing campaign than Dresden, in fact it was arguably a more legitimate target because of the considerable heavy industry in the city and its role a major sea port in the south of Japan, and that therefore your moral outrage in the case of Nagasaki is misplaced given your apparent acceptance of the destruction of Dresden. They were both manifestations of the precise same stratigic bombing campaign. Outrage at one, but not at the other, is inconsistant.


But that isn't what I've taken issue with, what I take issue with is your moral outrage at the comparison between Nagasaki and Dresden, as if one was more or less justifiable than the other.


Their legitimacy as a target isn't the only thing that matters though. The simple fact that the bomb thrown on Nagasaki was a nuclear bomb creates a whole lot of difference.

Also what do you claim to know about my stance on the Dresden bombing? All I have done in this thread is defend an action that the Dresden Antifa (which I have absolutely zero affiliation with) undertook against Nazis and their propaganda lies.



I haven't proffered a narrative or indeed taken issue with yours. So why don't you address what I did say, as opposed to a strawman you have constructed on my behalf?

I'm not "constructing a strawman", I'm putting what you quoted back into the context you ripped it out of.



So, by this logic scale of destruction and life lost is what matters, not the legitimacy of the target? However, if you actually look at Nagasaki in the context of the stratigic bombing campaign you will soon discover that in terms of life lost, and percent of the city destroyed, it was only a small part of a campaign. it has been estimated that the stratigic bombing of Japan in that last seven months of the war cost 700,000 Japanese lives and some 300,000+ civilians were killed in Germany as a result of the bombing campaign. As a result, heinus as the bombing of Nagasaki might appear to you, it actually represents a few percent of the total loss of life in the allied bombing camapigns in WW2. So my point is that decrying a comparison between one part of the campaign and another part of it is plainly ludicrous.

But we were not talking about the campaign as a whole here, we were talking specifically about the Dresden bombing and the Nagasaki bombing. You can't just change the topic like that.

[Invader Zim]

The simple fact that the bomb thrown on Nagasaki was a nuclear bomb creates a whole lot of difference.

Why? The atomic bombs were, in terms of destructive power, certainly capable of inflicting some of the worst damage in terms of individual raids but only on a par with the heaviest raids already being carried out with conventional bombs. The Tokyo fire bombing, for example, was in terms of building damage far more destructive than either Hiroshima or Nagasaki, and in terms of life lost was at least as deadly.

The ethical questions regarding the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki do not revolve as much around scale, because the damage they inflicted was not unique, but around necessity. And that too is one of the major moral and ethical questions surrounding Dresden. Fixating on scale of destruction, when you are talking about individual raids in the context of a global stratigic bombing campaign which claimed nearly (if not more than) a million lives, is to miss the point.


Also what do you claim to know about my stance on the Dresden bombing?

Precisely what you have told us in this thread, which given your justification for the city as a target and disgust at comparison with other raids, is pretty conclusive. If you think people are getting the wrong end of the stick, then perhaps you should consider clarifying your position rather than complaining?


I'm not "constructing a strawman", I'm putting what you quoted back into the context you ripped it out of.

You said that I had constructed a 'narrative' which the facts you presented do not suit. You also stated that I wrote off "the existence of Nazi-proliferating industry".

A brief examination of my post will show that I did not, in fact, present any narrative of the Dresden bombings, it will also reveal that I did not, at any point deny that Dresden did not have value to the nazi war machine, thus making it a target for Allied air power. So yes, you did construct an easily debunked strawman position, that is entirely divorced from what I actually wrote.

As for my queery, regarding your assertion that comparison between the Dresden bombing and the atomic bombing of Nagasaki, how did that 'rip' anything you stated from 'context'?


But we were not talking about the campaign as a whole here, we were talking specifically about the Dresden bombing and the Nagasaki bombing.

Discussing any air raid in WW2 out of context of the allied stratigic bombing campaign is pointless.... thats the whole point.


You can't just change the topic like that.

Clarifying the place of two WW2 air raids in the context of the WW2 stratigic bombing campaign is hardly 'changing the topic'. It would be like accusing a person of changing the topic when placing Auschwitz into the wider context of the holocaust as a whole. Clearly the fomer, as a topic of conversation, can't be divorced from the latter if the conversation is to retain any semblence of meaning or relevence.

[Widerstand]

Why? The atomic bombs were, in terms of destructive power, certainly capable of inflicting some of the worst damage in terms of individual raids but only on a par with the heaviest raids already being carried out with conventional bombs. The Tokyo fire bombing, for example, was in terms of building damage far more destructive than either Hiroshima or Nagasaki, and in terms of life lost was at least as deadly.

Nuclear bombing contaminates the area for decades, leads to cancer, birth defects, deformations, etc. Nuclear bombing affects several generations with basically no connection to the war. Even if the target of a nuclear bomb is justified by all strategical measures, nuclear bombing does much more than just the immediate damage. That's primarily the issue I take with Nagasaki and Hiroshima. (Aside from the fact that it's common in German right wing literature to refer to Dresden as "The German Hiroshima"; which is still better than the other names German right wingers have made up for Dresden, the most gross being "Bombing Holocaust" or "American holocaust against Germans".)



The ethical questions regarding the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki do not revolve as much around scale, because the damage they inflicted was not unique, but around necessity. And that too is one of the major moral and ethical questions surrounding Dresden. Fixating on scale of destruction, when you are talking about individual raids in the context of a global stratigic bombing campaign which claimed nearly (if not more than) a million lives, is to miss the point.

Well I take a different approach than you then (see above). Also the German far right discussion of Dresden analyzes the situation like this: "The attacks on Dresden were unjustified because Dresden was an innocent city: there was no industry in Dresden, Dresden didn't in any way contribute to WW2/The Holocaust." The AntiFa tour which has been attacked in this thread was to point out that this is a blatant lie. It's reasonable to assume that most people and groups involved aren't particularly fond of the Dresden bombing themselves, but that doesn't mean that Nazi distortions of history where Nazi Germany is portrayed as an "innocent victim of imperialism" shouldn't be opposed.



Precisely what you have told us in this thread, which given your justification for the city as a target and disgust at comparison with other raids, is pretty conclusive. If you think people are getting the wrong end of the stick, then perhaps you should consider clarifying your position rather than complaining?


Complaining? What I'm complaining about here is that people seem to say that opposing Nazi marches is wrong because the Nazis are picking the topic of Dresden. Now I'm terribly sorry if I got a bit heated up and misunderstood the points that people tried to get across, but to me what has been proposed in this thread appears to be the same as saying "the Nazis are right and deserve to march there."

My individual stance on Dresden, since you asked for it, is that I think that all the mystification of it and especially where it leads to intersections of Leftist "Anti-Imperialist" and Nazi "Pro-German" propaganda are to be vehemently opposed, criticized and deconstructed. I can say that a lot of the moral arguments I've heard against the bombing were based on blatant lies (eg. the "there was no industry in Dresden" or the "350.000 people died" arguments). Whether or not the Dresden bombing was necessary to end the war, I don't know. There are good arguments that it wasn't, though.



You said that I had constructed a 'narrative' which the facts you presented do not suit. You also stated that I wrote off "the existence of Nazi-proliferating industry".

A brief examination of my post will show that I did not, in fact, present any narrative of the Dresden bombings, it will also reveal that I did not, at any point deny that Dresden did not have value to the nazi war machine, thus making it a target for Allied air power. So yes, you did construct an easily debunked strawman position, that is entirely divorced from what I actually wrote.

I used "you" in the generalized way, as of "one". I'm terribly sorry if that wasn't clear. You just entered the discussion at that point. And at the risk of repeating myself: What has happened here is that I defended an action by the Dresden Antifa, in which they made a city tour and commented on various sites of Third Reich Dresden (synagogues that were attacked, houses where Jews used to live, place were the Nazis killed people, Nazi-proliferating industrial sites, etc.). They did this to tackle the very common myth floating around in Germany that Dresden was somehow isolated from the Third Reich, that there was no industry there, that it didn't contribute to the Holocaust, etc. (This is what is meant in Germany when people say "Dresden was innocent"). People then attacked this defense, calling me imperialist (which I guess means that the defense is "imperialist propaganda" and that Dresden really was isolated?). This is what I meant by "writing it out of existence because it suits the narrative". It's what the Nazis have done to rally the populace against the Allies, and it's (in my perception) what people have done here when they denounce the antifascist protest as American Imperialism - also just to make sure this doesn't get twisted again: Imperialism certainly was a major factor in Americas involvement in WW2, no doubt. I do however believe that American Imperialism can be attacked without falsifying and mystifying Dresden, and that such a mystification only plays into the hands of the Nazis.

[gorillafuck]

Where I get the idea that you think that? Well maybe because you are opposing the Anti-Nazi protests in Dresden? Maybe because you think it is somehow not right (and it indeed is quite left) to point out what role Dresden played in the Nazi machinery and that Dresden was far from being "innocent"?
Show me where I said I opposed the demonstrations. I asked for clarification on your wording, that was it.


That's at least closer to the actual number than the other crap thrown around on here, but recent estimates are around 18,000 deaths, peaking at 25.000.That's incorrect.


Also, the Dresden bombing didn't contaminate the area for decades, lead to masses of birth defects, cancer, etc. So no, the Dresden bombing was nowhere close to as bad as the Nagasaki bombing, that comparison is ridiculous.Hence why I said it's more comparable to the firebombing of tokyo.


Or the bombing of Hamburg, which had twice as many victims, left 900.000 people homeless, chemically contaminated huge areas around the harbor, etc. But as I said before, absolutely nobody cares about Hamburg because it can't be used for propaganda purposes as much as Dresden.I do. But why would that make me ignore the bombing of dresden?


Where does anyone support an imperialist war? Are you talking about those here who suggest that the Nazis weren't so bad because of what America did?Nobody here has remotely suggested that. Quote one post that even comes close.


When Nazis argue that Dresden was innocent what they argue is exactly that Dresden had no role in WW2 or the Holocaust, which is historical revisionism of the worst kind.I asked for clarification on your wording, maybe if you didn't cry whenever someone questions something you say (because this certainly isn't the first time) you'd have realized that and said this in the first place. Thank you for this part of your post, the only thing remotely relevant to your original question. I asked about your description of dresden not being innocent, because you have to admit that sounds shady unless you support the bombing (I hope you don't). That was all I said.


When you claim that fighting these lies and exposing them for what they are is "supporting imperialist war", you're siding with the Nazis. Like it or stop it.I never said anything remotely against the claim that dresden was involved in nazi activity, which I am aware it was. Quote me saying that exposing nazi lies is support for imperialism. Also, why is that relevant? I'd be opposed to allied imperialists either way.

[Tomhet]

Nobody claims that Dresden was full of 'innocent' people here to my knowledge..
BUT a very large civilian population were wiped out.. Although it was during wartime, it can't be wrote off as somehow less of a crime..

[Amphictyonis]

The fire bombing of Japan and subsequent nuclear attacks were worse than Dresden. Not many people know about the firebombing of Japan before the nukes were dropped. I don't mean to minimize Hitlers insane actions but it seems there are runners up in the most fucked up state/leaders category. It's almost like Hitler is used to minimize all other atrocities committed by the west. If you look at western capitalism through a historical lens it's probably killed upwards of 100 million people. The US alone has killed probably around 30 million at least. Native Americans, slaves, Japanese, the poor, middle easterners, Koreans, Vietnamese, South Americans etc and so on. Hell, Hitler gained much of his views from American eugenicists. If you read Mien Kampf that becomes very apparent. Who gets the royalties from Mien Kampf by the way?

[gorillafuck]

The fire bombing of Japan and subsequent nuclear attacks were worse than Dresden. Not many people know about the firebombing of Japan before the nukes were dropped.That's true, I searched and apparently the firebombing of Tokyo killed about 100,000, I thought it was less than that. But still, the bombing of Dresden was incredibly severe. And the bombing of Dresden killed more than 18,000-25,000.

[Widerstand]

Show me where I said I opposed the demonstrations. I asked for clarification on your wording, that was it.

That's right you didn't oppose them, you suggested they were apologizing for imperialism.


Explain this, because this statement looks like it's apologizing for the bombing of Dresden. I hope I'm mistaken.

I support exposing Nazi lies and not letting them use dresden to promote their agenda, but would these antifascists try to expose how Nagasaki "wasn't so innocent" either?

emph. added. Admittedly, you added an "I hope I'm mistaken" but the polemic concerning Nagasaki is pretty clear that you already made up your mind.



That's incorrect.

Well then I guess the research team put together by the Dresden municipality were either lying or doing bad work. That's the numbers I'm using.


I do. But why would that make me ignore the bombing of dresden?

Okay, maybe you do, but the majority of people (in Germany at least) don't, and the rhetoric used here is very similar to German right wing rhetoric in that regard. If you are at all familiar with German discourse regarding Dresden it should not be hard to see why I was calling people Nazi supporters earlier.



Nobody here has remotely suggested that. Quote one post that even comes close.

Can you tell me how else I should understand this post other than as "Protesting the Nazi March is just as bad as the Nazi March", in the context of this thread? I'm having a very hard time trying to come up with another way of reading this post which was almost completely unrelated to anything said before.


Firebombing cities is mass murder no matter who governs them. Apologizing for American and British atrocities is no more acceptable than apologizing for Nazi atrocities.



I asked for clarification on your wording, maybe if you didn't cry whenever someone questions something you say (because this certainly isn't the first time) you'd have realized that and said this in the first place. Thank you for this part of your post, the only thing remotely relevant to your original question. I asked about your description of dresden not being innocent, because you have to admit that sounds shady unless you support the bombing (I hope you don't). That was all I said.

It doesn't sound shady. Nazis in Germany say that Dresden was innocent (they are also about the only ones who use this rhetoric), and what they mean with it is very clearly that Dresden had no role in WW2/The Holocaust. Repeating Nazi propaganda puts one on the same side as the Nazis, as far as I'm concerned, which is why I attacked people who used similar arguments.

As far as the Dresden bombing goes, I've stated my position above.



I never said anything remotely against the claim that dresden was involved in nazi activity, which I am aware it was. Quote me saying that exposing nazi lies is support for imperialism.

Maybe you didn't, but others you backed sure as hell suggested that (refer to TC's posts all throughout this thread).


Also, why is that relevant? I'd be opposed to allied imperialists either way.

I hope you would. If it's not important then why is it important whether or not the Dresden bombing was part of American Imperialism when one opposes Nazis? Seems like a bit of a double standard...

[TwoSevensClash]

You'll notice that, out of the three primary forces in the Allied offensive against Nazi Germany, one side in particular is not mentioned here LOL
I guess no one cares about the mass rape of German women

[gorillafuck]

That's right you didn't oppose them, you suggested they were apologizing for imperialism.
When?


emph. added. Admittedly, you added an "I hope I'm mistaken" but the polemic concerning Nagasaki is pretty clear that you already made up your mind.I don't think it makes that very clear at all. Neither do the rules of the English language. I was asking questions of clarification.


Well then I guess the research team put together by the Dresden municipality were either lying or doing bad work. That's the numbers I'm using. I have heard that the most reliable figures according to historians (who's names I admittedly do not know) place it at 35,000. It's not very relevant to the discussion though so that can be dropped, whatever.


Okay, maybe you do, but the majority of people (in Germany at least) don't, and the rhetoric used here is very similar to German right wing rhetoric in that regard. If you are at all familiar with German discourse regarding Dresden it should not be hard to see why I was calling people Nazi supporters earlier.Go by what people say. Not by what you percieve them to believe based on what right-wing Germans say, that's actually a really, really irrational way of debating on a leftist forum that has mostly non-Germans. That's not going to get you far in discussing poltics, or having discussions with, well, anybody who isn't familiar with the German political scene.


Can you tell me how else I should understand this post other than as "Protesting the Nazi March is just as bad as the Nazi March", in the context of this thread? I'm having a very hard time trying to come up with another way of reading this post which was almost completely unrelated to anything said before.I actually do see how it could look that way, yeah. Not how I saw it though. I think she was referring to the quote that I was also referring to. She thought that by calling Dresden "not so innocent" you were justifying the bombings. She can say what she meant because it's not that clear.


It doesn't sound shady. Nazis in Germany say that Dresden was innocent (they are also about the only ones who use this rhetoric), and what they mean with it is very clearly that Dresden had no role in WW2/The Holocaust. Repeating Nazi propaganda puts one on the same side as the Nazis, as far as I'm concerned, which is why I attacked people who used similar arguments.I was referring to a quote in the OP about Dresden not being innocent. I explicitly made no assumptions about what you said and just asked what you meant. I was referring to "The topic was to point out Dresden's role in the Nazi machinery and to debunk the myth that Dresden was "innocent". I wanted clarification because I found that quote hard to understand what you meant by. I don't see the problem.


Maybe you didn't, but others you backed sure as hell suggested that (refer to TC's posts all throughout this thread).It is indisputable that I didn't.

And I haven't read through this entire thread, sorry. Can you quote where TC was apologizing for nazi's, and explain how the quote apologizes for nazi's? Skimming her posts I did not find anything, I might missed something. I've only found her and you disagreeing in a way where from what I can tell neither of you seem to be nazi's or pro-imperialists....


I hope you would. If it's not important then why is it important whether or not the Dresden bombing was part of American Imperialism when one opposes Nazis? Seems like a bit of a double standard...Reword that because that made no sense. What I said was that I oppose allied imperialism bombing a city regardless of whether or not it is involved with nazi activity.


I guess no one cares about the mass rape of German womenOh man, we once has a hoxhaist who was saying the mass rape of German women was justified. I raged.

[Widerstand]

I guess no one cares about the mass rape of German women

Not saying it didn't happen, but do you have a (leftist) source for this? I only ever heard this claim in history class at school.

[TwoSevensClash]

Not saying it didn't happen, but do you have a (leftist) source for this? I only ever heard this claim in history class at school.
I don't have a leftist source but it did happen.

[Reznov]

Are they called Nazis in Dresden?

What are they actually called in Europe and Dresden?

[Widerstand]

Are they called Nazis in Dresden?

What are they actually called in Europe and Dresden?

The German left calls them Nazis/Neonazis (one of the big coalitions, which includes bourgeois parties, is called Dresden-Nazifrei / Dresden without Nazis). Some far right groups use the same terms (National Socialists), for example the now forbidden KDS (Kameradschaft Deutscher Sozialisten / Camaraderie of German Socialist).
As to who actually mobilized to Dresden: A lot of groups, from the whole spectrum (Parties such as the NPD and Republikaner; Networks and Initiatives such as Pro-NRW; loosely organized affinity groups of Autonomous Nationalists often called Free/Autonomous Camaraderies; Studentenverbindungen; etc.). There are prolly a lot of non-German groups, too. Especially Austrian and Swiss groups like to export Nazi mobs to Germany.

Also since people were asking: The AK Antifa Dresden has yesterday evening published their position on the 13th February in Dresden. You can read it on their blog (http://dresden1302.noblogs.org/post/2011/02/15/grundlagenpapier-des-ak-antifa-dresden-zum-13-februar/). Use google translate or something, I'm too lazy to translate that (also note that there are lots of other texts on Dresden and the bombing).

[Delenda Carthago]

The most important for me is that the german Left has moved way to the Right(see Die"Linke")while the nazis are steady on their positions and beeing able to absorv all the anger of the german people during the crisis.Thats whats up.

[revolution inaction]

Staatsfeind (http://www.revleft.com/vb/../member.php?u=29716) when you say something like "dresden was not innocent" it sounds like you are saying that everyone in dresden was guilty and deserved to get burned to death. this has nothing to do with nazi propaganda, most of us have not encountered any about dresden, it just how someone who is not familiar with german politics will interpret that phrase, so it shouldn't be surprising people ask you what that was about.

[Widerstand]

The most important for me is that the german Left has moved way to the Right(see Die"Linke")while the nazis are steady on their positions and beeing able to absorv all the anger of the german people during the crisis.Thats whats up.

Who moved to the right? The main groups behind Die Linke didn't really move to the right, their politics were the same before they formed Die Linke. For the rest of the German left (safe for a few entryiststs) Die Linke is largely as relevant as the SPD or Die Grünen, eg. not at all, this is also luckily the case with a lot of grassroots working class groups.

Die Linke never was part of the German far left. If anyone in the German far left is moving to the right, it's the IL (interventionistische Linke).


Staatsfeind (http://www.revleft.com/vb/../member.php?u=29716) when you say something like "dresden was not innocent" it sounds like you are saying that everyone in dresden was guilty and deserved to get burned to death. this has nothing to do with nazi propaganda, most of us have not encountered any about dresden, it just how someone who is not familiar with german politics will interpret that phrase, so it shouldn't be surprising people ask you what that was about.

Okay. If anyone genuinely isn't aware of the context and meaning of these phrases that's unfortunate, but I can't really blame them. However when this unawareness is coupled with denunciations of antifascist actions as imperialism-support, it does sound a fucking lot literally like Nazi propaganda.

"Most of us have not encountered any about Dresden" - yet people in another thread were claiming that the Dresden bombings had 350.000 victims - where does this claim come from then? To put it this way: it's hardly the first time I've encountered people reproducing Nazi propaganda on this forum, I have a certain feeling it won't be the last time either (whatever happened to the no-platform policy?).

[Pavlov's House Party]

That's at least closer to the actual number than the other crap thrown around on here, but recent estimates are around 18,000 deaths, peaking at 25.000.
Like that makes it any better :rolleyes:

[Rusty Shackleford]

oh jesus christ.

fire bombing dresden - lots of civilian deaths.

fire bombing of tokyo - lots of civilian deaths.

obviously firebombing is bad. way bad.

it takes almost everything to defeat a fascist state. the allied powers used the technology available to them at the time.

Nazis are hypocrites(what else is new)

[Crimson Commissar]

it takes almost everything to defeat a fascist state. the allied powers used the technology available to them at the time.
Oh great, apologising for US war crimes again? This time with Japan too? For fuck sake, massacring CIVILIANS just because their government is fascist isn't right at all. This is why I'm fucking sickened by this extremist anti-fascism.

Oh and piss off if any of you are going to call me a "nazi sympathiser" for what I just said.

[Wanted Man]

Well, I think Staatsfeind is mostly attacking windmills, but he is right about one thing, namely that you do sometimes see the appearance of some aspects of neo-nazi propaganda when it comes to the latter days of WWII. This is not deliberate, but it's the result of basic "anti-imperialism", general opposition to inhumane warfare practices like terror-bombing, inability to analyse fascism, etc.

The idea is basically that war and killing is "just as bad" in every circumstance, and therefore the people in Dresden were victims as much as anyone. Sure, we had the Holocaust and everything, but the allies weren't always good guys either!!! It can also be very potent red-baiting because the next subjects are usually population transfers and mass rapes in German areas by Soviet soldiers, then Katyn, then Molotov-Ribbentrop, etc. Basically, the world consists of shades of grey and everyone was equally bad, but especially the Nazi-communist totalitarians who just happened to end up fighting each other. This is basically the bourgeois-democratic version of the acceptance of propaganda surrounding Allied war crimes.

The authentic Nazi version is a lot more crude and cheeky, where you can take the position of denying or minimising the real Holocaust, while simultaneously calling Dresden the "bombing Holocaust" and inflating the number of victims. Obviously nobody in their right minds, whether bourgeois-liberal or socialist anti-imperialist, is going to copy that use of words directly. But its basic direction, its underlying minimisation of fascism and the Holocaust, and its emphasis on Allied war crimes (of which there are certainly numerous horrible examples) does have influence.

Of course all this is uncomfortable to people who want to separate everything from politics and simply mourn the innocent people who died. Unfortunately, these things are not isolated, and the fact that Dresden is such a massive rallying point for Nazis 60 years later is absolute proof of this. So while I think Staatsfeind is being incredibly paranoid, he is right to say that antifas are there for a reason, and that the way in which people treat the bombing of Dresden has political implications.

[gorillafuck]

Not saying it didn't happen, but do you have a (leftist) source for this? I only ever heard this claim in history class at school.It's pretty well acknowledged by historians that this happened in Japan, I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if it happened in Germany.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_during_the_occupation_of_Germany This obviously has an anti-soviet bias (the idea that rape is a mostly soviet thing, hahaha) but there's some information on there that's definitely worth reading.

[Widerstand]

Like that makes it any better :rolleyes:

Actually yes, I think the 325.000 people who didn't actually die are pretty happy about it.

[Devrim]

it takes almost everything to defeat a fascist state. the allied powers used the technology available to them at the time.

This sounds to me like somebody justifying their own states imperialist wars.

Devrim